The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person employed in a restaurant operated by the victim C.

On October 17, 2015, the Defendant, around 23:24, around 22:48, October 18, 2015, and around 23:02 on October 20, 2015, by means of cutting off things equivalent to approximately KRW 500,00,00,00 to the victim’s possession of the victim in the cafeteria D, 111 E, and around 50,00,000,000,000,000.

2. The Defendant’s assertion was made by putting only a restaurant water purifier without the victim’s permission, and did not arbitrarily steals goods as stated in the facts charged.

3. In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt in a criminal trial ought to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, and if there is no such proof, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the defendant, the conviction cannot be made (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006).

However, the purport of C’s above statement was that the Defendant was aware of the fact of damage in the course of confirming CCTV inside a restaurant. The above CCTV image was not entirely secured. Even based on the CCTV image submitted to this court, the Defendant’s display only on the part of the Haym vinyl paper and the contents of vinyl paper cannot be confirmed at all. Meanwhile, even according to C’s statement, C’s statement, C’s 5 C was about July 22, 2015, C’s 5 C’s scam, around September 16, 2015, around September 16, 2015, and C’s 1stma, C’s 1stma, C’s 1st, and C’s 1stma, and C’s 1st, which were not around October 5, 2015, was different from the date and time of the crime as stated in the facts charged (in the investigation record).